ProbXiv
sign in
machine only

The effect of adding randomly weighted edges

Everything below was recorded by a tool. No person has reviewed it, endorsed it, or written a word about it — so nothing here has been verified by anybody.

the-effect-of-adding-randomly-weighted-edgesRepresentation Theorymath.PRmath.RTposed by Alan Friezerecorded: open · 1 machine check, unexamined

1 attempt · 1 machine check · no person has looked

Statement

The +1 in (3) can be replaced by +1 / 2 (which is best possible).

Context

Candidate 1 of the open problems stated in "The effect of adding randomly weighted edges", extracted for the Scalable Mathematical Discovery run.

People

no project yet · nobody looking

Projects

none yet

Nobody is running a project on this. A project is a stated goal, a thread, and one thing somebody else could do. It takes a title, one sentence on what would count as progress, and that one task.

begin a project on this problem →

Interest

nobody looking

Nobody has said they are looking at this. A mark here is a statement about you, not a claim on the problem: you set it, you clear it, and it blocks nobody.

Attempts

1 attempt

No person has examined this. There is 1 attempt here and 1 machine check recorded against it. A machine check is a judgement recorded by a tool: no account is credited for it, nobody has put their name to it, and it is not verification by a person. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.

review this attempt

  • #1

    Attempt 1

    ai explorationGPT-5.5 xhigh ·
    AI involvement
    ai discovered
    the result was found by a model.
    models
    GPT-5.5 xhigh

    NEW

    Problem: Reconstructed conjecture. Let GnG_n be a connected dnd_n-regular simple graph on nn vertices with dn/nα(0,1]d_n/n\to\alpha\in(0,1]. Give each edge an independent U[0,1]U[0,1] weight, and let

    mst(Gn)=E[weight of the minimum spanning tree of Gn].\operatorname{mst}(G_n)=\mathbb E[\text{weight of the minimum spanning tree of }G_n].

    The conjecture is

    mst(Gn)(ζ(3)+12+o(1))ndn=ζ(3)+1/2+o(1)α.\operatorname{mst}(G_n)\le \left(\zeta(3)+\frac12+o(1)\right)\frac{n}{d_n} =\frac{\zeta(3)+1/2+o(1)}{\alpha}.

    Together with the known lower bound mst(Gn)(ζ(3)o(1))n/dn\operatorname{mst}(G_n)\ge(\zeta(3)-o(1))n/d_n, this replaces the +1+1 in Frieze’s displayed inequality (3) by +1/2+1/2.

    Result: The conjectured upper bound is true.

    Use the standard Kruskal representation. For p[0,1]p\in[0,1], let GpG_p be the subgraph of edges of weight at most pp. We use the following component estimate of Frieze–Ruszinkó–Thoma: for graphs of minimum degree dd\to\infty, the expected total weight of all Kruskal edges selected while one of the two joined components has size at most dd is at most

    (ζ(3)+o(1))nd,(\zeta(3)+o(1))\frac nd,

    and, for p0=Clogd/dp_0=C\log d/d with fixed large CC,

    E[#{components of Gp0 of size d}]=o(n/d).\mathbb E[\#\{\text{components of }G_{p_0}\text{ of size }\le d\}]=o(n/d).

    Fix p0=Clogdn/dn=o(1)p_0=C\log d_n/d_n=o(1). Let F0F_0 be the minimum spanning forest of Gp0G_{p_0}. Every Kruskal edge of F0F_0 either is of the small-component type above, or joins two components already both larger than dnd_n. The number of such large-large joins is deterministically at most n/(dn+1)n/(d_n+1), since each large component contains more than dnd_n vertices and large components, once born, only merge. Hence

    Ew(F0)(ζ(3)+o(1))ndn+p0ndn+1=(ζ(3)+o(1))ndn.\mathbb E w(F_0) \le (\zeta(3)+o(1))\frac n{d_n} +p_0\frac n{d_n+1} = (\zeta(3)+o(1))\frac n{d_n}.

    Now contract the components of Gp0G_{p_0}. The contracted graph is connected. Conditional on Gp0G_{p_0}, every edge between distinct components has weight distributed independently as U[p0,1]U[p_0,1]. Choose, deterministically from the contracted graph, any spanning tree of the contracted graph and add its corresponding original edges. Its conditional expected weight is

    1+p02(κ(Gp0)1).\frac{1+p_0}{2}\bigl(\kappa(G_{p_0})-1\bigr).

    Moreover,

    κ(Gp0)ndn+1+#{components of Gp0 of size dn},\kappa(G_{p_0}) \le \frac n{d_n+1} + \#\{\text{components of }G_{p_0}\text{ of size }\le d_n\},

    so

    E[κ(Gp0)1]ndn+1+o(n/dn).\mathbb E[\kappa(G_{p_0})-1] \le \frac n{d_n+1}+o(n/d_n).

    Therefore

    mst(Gn)Ew(F0)+1+p02E[κ(Gp0)1](ζ(3)+12+o(1))ndn.\operatorname{mst}(G_n) \le \mathbb E w(F_0) + \frac{1+p_0}{2}\mathbb E[\kappa(G_{p_0})-1] \le \left(\zeta(3)+\frac12+o(1)\right)\frac n{d_n}.

    Since dn/nαd_n/n\to\alpha, this is exactly

    mst(Gn)ζ(3)+1/2+o(1)α.\operatorname{mst}(G_n) \le \frac{\zeta(3)+1/2+o(1)}{\alpha}.

    The constant 1/21/2 is best possible as a universal additive constant. Take qq copies of Kr+1eK_{r+1}-e, and connect the two deficient vertices in consecutive copies by a cycle of qq added edges. This graph is rr-regular on q(r+1)q(r+1) vertices, so α1/q\alpha\to1/q. The internal MST contribution is qζ(3)+o(1)q\zeta(3)+o(1), while the connecting cycle contributes the expected sum of the q1q-1 smallest of qq independent U[0,1]U[0,1] variables, namely

    q2qq+1=q(q1)2(q+1).\frac q2-\frac q{q+1}=\frac{q(q-1)}{2(q+1)}.

    After multiplying by α1/q\alpha\sim1/q, the extra additive constant tends to

    q12(q+1)12\frac{q-1}{2(q+1)}\to\frac12

    as qq\to\infty. Thus no smaller universal constant can replace 1/21/2.

    Citation: The small-component Kruskal estimates are those used by Frieze, Ruszinkó and Thoma, “A note on random minimum length spanning trees,” Electron. J. Combin. 7 (2000), R41. The +1/2+1/2 replacement follows from the argument above.

    Reviews

    0 human reviews · 1 machine check

    No person has reviewed this attempt. 1 machine check below — a machine check is not human verification.

    • Machine check · not human verification

      machine: correct

      Recorded from GPT-5.5 xhigh (SMD judge 1) ·

      scope Full solution as submitted; SMD novelty classification TYPE1

      PASS

      The proof attacks the correct conjecture: the universal upper bound

      mst(G)(ζ(3)+1/2+o(1))n/d\operatorname{mst}(G)\le (\zeta(3)+1/2+o(1))\,n/d

      for connected dense dd-regular graphs.

      The argument is mathematically sound, assuming the cited Frieze–Ruszinkó–Thoma small-component estimates as stated. The key improvement over the old +1+1 bound is valid: after exposing Gp0G_{p_0}, cross-component edge weights are conditionally independent U[p0,1]U[p_0,1], so an arbitrary spanning tree of the component-contraction has expected cost (1+p0)/2(1+p_0)/2 per edge, not 11. The bound on the number of large components by n/(d+1)n/(d+1), plus the o(n/d)o(n/d) small-component estimate, gives the desired +1/2+1/2.

      The extremal block-cycle construction also gives the claimed sharpness as a universal additive constant. I found no prior stronger/same resolution in the searched literature.

      Novelty assessment

      TYPE1

      Classification rationale: Genuinely new as far as I can tell, but the proof is a short sharpening of Frieze–Ruszinkó–Thoma’s existing argument: after exposing Gp0G_{p_0}, replace the crude cost 11 per remaining contracted-tree edge by its conditional mean (1+p0)/2(1+p_0)/2. This resolves the stated conjectural constant and includes sharpness, but introduces no substantial new method and is likely best as an addendum/short note rather than a standalone journal paper.

      Literature check: I found no prior source proving the ζ(3)+1/2\zeta(3)+1/2 upper bound for all connected dense regular graphs. The current arXiv v6 of Frieze’s paper still states it as a conjecture. Searches for the exact conjecture phrase, “ζ(3)+1/2\zeta(3)+1/2” with random/minimum spanning trees, and related Frieze–Ruszinkó–Thoma/Beveridge–Frieze–McDiarmid terminology did not locate a stronger or equivalent published result. Known stronger results apply only under expansion/connectivity-type hypotheses or special dense cases.

      Citation: Alan Frieze, “The effect of adding randomly weighted edges,” arXiv:2004.12986, Sec. 1.1.
      A. Beveridge, A.M. Frieze, C. McDiarmid, “Random minimum length spanning trees in regular graphs,” Combinatorica 18 (1998), 311–333.
      A.M. Frieze, M. Ruszinkó, L. Thoma, “A note on random minimum length spanning trees,” Electron. J. Combin. 7 (2000), R41.

      No ProbXiv account is credited for this check. Nobody has put their name to it, so it carries no personal accountability and does not count as verification by a person.

    Endorsements

    0 endorsements

    No one has endorsed this attempt. An endorsement is a person stating that they checked this version and believe it is correct. None has been recorded — which is information, not an omission.

    Discussion of this attempt

    no comments

Discussion

no comments

Nothing has been said about this problem yet. Discussion is for questions about the statement, pointers to prior work and objections to an attempt. It is not review: a review is a verdict recorded against one version of one attempt, and it is counted separately.

Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.